It's not you, it's me —

Facebook, it’s time for a break

61 percent of users want to save the drama for their (real life) mamas.

We all have that friend who has stubbornly disappeared from Facebook at one time or another, only to reappear some weeks or months later. In fact, that friend has a good chance of being you, according to a new report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project. The report, published Tuesday, says a hefty majority of Facebook users—61 percent—report having "taken a break" from the site for several weeks or more, largely because they didn't have the time or energy to be part of Facebook's Internet society.

Of the 1,006 Pew surveyed in December 2012, seemingly everybody said they'd gotten sick of Facebook at some point, but 20 percent said they were currently on their Facebook sabbaticals. Another 27 percent said they planned to spend less time on the site in the next year. Though most users didn't plan to change their time spent on the site, only three percent reported wanting to increase their time socially networking.

As for why, the reasons were varied but generally shared the same theme. The top reason (at 21 percent) was because users simply didn't have time to dedicate to "liking" their friends' cat photos, pruning their friend lists, or commenting on people's check-ins to the airport. Equal amounts said they simply weren't into it and that it was a waste of time, and a full nine percent said their reason for pursuing some non-Facebook time was because there was "too much drama/gossip/negativity/conflict."

After witnessing even one comment fight between your grandma and your drinking buddies from college—and I have—it's hard to blame those users for wanting a little "me" time. But although the numbers might seem like an early death knell for social media, it's just as likely to be a normal social cycle as people feel out what level of communication fits them. After all, Pew's same report claims 92 percent of those who use social networks still keep a profile on Facebook, whether they're taking a break from it or not. In that sense, Facebook is a bit like the Hotel California—you can log out anytime you like, but you can (almost) never leave.

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

99 Reader Comments

I deleted my account on August 19th last year and only just within the last week or so signed up again. I simply got tired of people posting ridiculous political comments and other similar crap. When I decided to sign back up, I decided to significantly pare down the number of friends I have on there. I went from 175 or so to 30. I also took the opportunity to put people into groups as they accepted my friend requests. That way I can kind of keep things separated into individual groups and don't have a huge jumbled mess on my news feed all the time.

a hefty majority of Facebook users—61 percent—report having "taken a break" from the site for several weeks or more

I've been on a break for a number of years now. Once FB expanded beyond colleges, and started including apps/games, the drama and inanity just exploded. I have more fun sorting and filtering email by hand than wading through the dreck on Facebook. Yes, I'm careful about who I "friend", and my privacy settings are meticulously tuned.

Quote:

Facebook is a bit like the Hotel California—you can log out anytime you like, but you can (almost) never leave.

After witnessing even one comment fight between your grandma and your drinking buddies from college—and I have—it's hard to blame those users for wanting a little "me" time.

This is why I felt the site was ruined when it expanded to everyone. It went from just my "drinking buddies" (my college friends) to include family. Now I can't post anything because I'll offend someone, or someone will post something in response that offends someone.

I don't want to do complicated groups to separate things. They change their systems every 3 months, and so I'm never sure that just because family/friends can't see a post today that they'll be unable to see it in 3-6 months. And I frankly can't keep up with it all.

I want separate networks (I don't care how it's implemented) for different groups of people. Google+ is sort of vaguely close to the solution, but no one uses it so I can't really test it. Facebook has similar functionality, but I don't trust them to not change it.

Last year in particular may have been a big time for 'taking a break.' More than handful of my friends couldn't tolerate the political fights on FB anymore and took a break until after the US election.

Facebook has it's uses. I keep up with friends and family from back home, all of whom are excellent people. I don't mind liking the occasional cat picture, even.

On the other hand, the need for facebook sabbaticals is definitely there. The drawback to keeping up with all the friends and family back home is the fact that many said friends and family are either overly conservative or overly liberal, and definitely have to let you know when you're "wrong on the internet" (cue xkcd cartoon), and then the fireworks start.

I've taken two breaks from FB before, and have contemplated doing so again. I'll never kill my account, though, because other than the politics and religion, they're good people.

Facebook = reality TV for the interwebs. I chopped my friends list down to a couple of dozen people - mostly family and friends - and check in every now and then to see the occasional baby photo/vid. The very occasional "use" I have to give it in my professional capacities at work is always enough to remind me of why I stopped using it.

The only thing even remotely close to drama I've ever seen on Facebook is people just posting/sharing ignorant shit. I hide it and get on with me life. Facebook's only as good/bad as the people you have on your list. Get better people.

I know this may be a point of minutia amidst the larger point of the article... but I'd just like to note that I almost never have to "prune" my friends list. But then, I almost never friend people who aren't... you know... my friends.

In fact, not more then an hour ago, I ignored a friend request from a person because I don't know them, and I don't know a single one of their friends. I also specifically noted that their "friends" list appeared to be a bunch of random people from random places, without a single city or school in common amongst the lot. It makes me wonder if the person who friended me actually knows any of their "friends".

I mean seriously... what social convention calls people you've never met and know absolutely nothing about "friends"?

After witnessing even one comment fight between your grandma and your drinking buddies from college—and I have—it's hard to blame those users for wanting a little "me" time.

This is why I felt the site was ruined when it expanded to everyone. It went from just my "drinking buddies" (my college friends) to include family. Now I can't post anything because I'll offend someone, or someone will post something in response that offends someone.

I don't want to do complicated groups to separate things. They change their systems every 3 months, and so I'm never sure that just because family/friends can't see a post today that they'll be unable to see it in 3-6 months. And I frankly can't keep up with it all.

I want separate networks (I don't care how it's implemented) for different groups of people. Google+ is sort of vaguely close to the solution, but no one uses it so I can't really test it. Facebook has similar functionality, but I don't trust them to not change it.

I feel the same as you do. I post or share anymore almost for a year now.

Google+ idea seems to be better in that regards, but like you said it, nobody uses it. And even while Facebook has the similar private settings, they make as complicated as possible to restrict this and they keep resetting everything back. I just don´t trust them either. One day your stuff is private and the other day a bug just made it public. Facebook wants everyone to keep everything as public as possible so they make it as hard as possible to have private groups.

Im just sick of Facebook. Its the worst thing that happen to the Internet. People waste invaluable time sharing idiotic posts and Facebook is getting rich at it. At least Google+ has more quality content and lets you keep business out of friends and family out of the rest.

The idea is good, but its just not having any traction because people are just to focused on Facebook. I think the only social network I could use in the future is probably twitter because its as private as possible and as less intrusive as possible. Facebook is like a virus, they keep spamming you in your phone (I can´t install them) and email so you keep coming back. They are very intrusive.

Facebook's only as good/bad as the people you have on your list. Get better people.

No, it's not that simple. Sometimes you want to stay in touch with a thoughtful, intelligent person who just happens to be a heavy user -- but you don't want to be flooded with every detail from that person's life. Telling the feed to only show "important" posts doesn't cut the mustard.

Also, I had to opt-out/manually disable the awful privacy-negligent apps and games. That alone makes FB pretty terrible IMO.

I read somewhere that the kiddies are leaning towards Tumblr now for their online time.

I'm really not surprised by the shift in interest away from Facebook. I think one factor not mentioned is that when Facebook got bigger, went public, and had to please shareholders, a large number of Facebook users (particularly younger folks) said subconsciously, "Wow, Facebook is like a full on corporation, and EVERYONE is on it. That's not cool."

Many advertisements show Twitter and Facebook icons now and if your parents and grandparents are on those sites, I feel the natural response for the younger demographic is to go elsewhere.

There is a need for a friend feed, there is a need for online photos, and there is a need to have it all put together. We've for RSS, and Picasa/TwitPic/Instagram, why can't we create a federated experience without the central data warehousing (and privacy violations, and all that crap) of Facebook?

There is a need for a friend feed, there is a need for online photos, and there is a need to have it all put together. We've for RSS, and Picasa/TwitPic/Instagram, why can't we create a federated experience without the central data warehousing (and privacy violations, and all that crap) of Facebook?

That's a service I'd use instead of facebook.

Who are "we" in this scenario? No one stops you from creating such a service.

Personally, I don't have much of a use for it. If people have something they need to tell me, and I'm interested in hearing about it, they have my email address. Or my phone number. Or they know where I live. Facebook, Twitter... social media in general, it's just another soap box for a world full of people already waaaaaay too high on their own opinions. I walked away from all of it last year and I haven't missed it for a minute.

I deleted my acct due to rampant snooping/requests from co-workers(and we know how HR depts like to go snooping too) along with feeling like my privacy was just a whim they casually made jokes about during their "How can we get over on users this time" meetings. I even had it locked down to where I was practically not to be found, but since they changed that now, I'm completely not interested. Now with everything they are doing in the name of the mighty dollar, whats left of my privacy does not need FB wiping it's taint on it and expecting me to be okay with it and excited as well.

My facebook account makes me miss my google plus account so badly. For me, at least, google plus flows incredibly better than facebook. I feel like I can easily weed through the conversations I want to follow, keep everyone in my circles organized neatly, target sharing with the people I want to without feeling like I'm going to want to pull my hair out the way facebook's friend grouping makes me feel... and it's all without the asinine semantics facebook uses, which are what cause about 90% of the facebook grief I see: calling individuals "friends," making "friending" a two way thing instead of two separate one way processes, and using the wording of "like" all form some deep semantic attachments to the actions and designations. Google plus is by comparison so much cleaner... if you don't put someone in one of your circles it's not a big deal, it's not you "saying you're not their friend," if you don't plus one something it's not you "not liking something."

But good luck getting the majority of people that are the reason I even have an active account at all on facebook to move over to Plus.

Personally I like being able to keep in touch both narrowly and broadly with friends, acquaintances, business related contacts, etc. I really like having a strong internet networking tool. But facebook stinks. I hate using it. Everytime they change something I end up disliking it even more, especially because I also have professional exposure to it. I feel like I'm stuck using it because it's what everyone I want to keep in contact with uses. Which just makes me resent it even more.

The choice seemed to be between having everybody I know on there and saying only suitably anodyne things or having just my real friends on there and saying nothing I don't also say in real life. Neither one added to my life.

I deleted my Facebook and Twitter accounts last summer. There's just something about social media that I can't get into. I never feel like my life is interesting enough to journal everything I do and I feel the same way about most people's lives. It's primary use seems to be for people to constantly vomit whatever thought pops into their head... and cat photos.

One thing that's bothered me about leaving and that's how a lot of sites try to get you to use your Facebook account. Also not a big fan of Facebook pages being used as a replacement for a proper website.

Facebook's only as good/bad as the people you have on your list. Get better people.

No, it's not that simple. Sometimes you want to stay in touch with a thoughtful, intelligent person who just happens to be a heavy user -- but you don't want to be flooded with every detail from that person's life. Telling the feed to only show "important" posts doesn't cut the mustard.

So hide them from your feed altogether and just visit their profile every so often to 'catch up'.

I've got some family members on Facebook that I don't feel comfortable 'unfriending' but I hid them from my feed and they basically don't exist to me. I visit their profile from time to time to see that they're still alive and annoying.

I bet there are many people like me who haven't officially taken a break by closing the account (which of course is only temporary and can be reverted on a whim), but nonetheless never log in except to respond to direct messages. There is value in using it as a communication tool (e-mail lacks the discoverability of facebook), but I use it for nothing else and I doubt I'm the only one. Everytime I log in (which is rare), I am instantly reminded of why I never log on.

I took a break from facebook for about 5 or so years. I signed back up early last year and I've been very selective about who I become friends with. The experience has been a lot better this go around. I mostly use it for sharing pictures of my kids with the rest of the my family and to stay connected with my oldest sons 4H group. I'm also connected with ars (of course) and the local news outlets. Otherwise, if I'm not close friends with someone or they're not family, I just don't accept their requests.

Facebook is a bit like the Hotel California—you can log out anytime you like, but you can (almost) never leave.

The problem is when you have friends that only use FB as their only means of communication. My wife, who rarely goes on facebook, had a friend get mad at her because she didn't call to give her sympathy when the friend's dog died. The friend posted it on facebook assuming everyone was seeing it. No effort to let my wife know beyond that.

I think people are starting to realize that a lot of the Facebook interaction with people is really superficial compared to direct 1-1 conversations, be it online or in person. That and facebook in a way makes a lot of people feel depressed, because it's a constant reminder that other people are always doing cool things, and the majority of stuff people post is positive. So stuff is always happening to other people, but not you. Life in the fast lane is not always that fun.

Facebook is a bit like the Hotel California—you can log out anytime you like, but you can (almost) never leave.

The problem is when you have friends that only use FB as their only means of communication. My wife, who rarely goes on facebook, had a friend get mad at her because she didn't call to give her sympathy when the friend's dog died. The friend posted it on facebook assuming everyone was seeing it. No effort to let my wife know beyond that.

This. Most of my friends have become that person. I'm not on there so I basically don't exist any more. The saddest thing is none of them even realize what they've become.

I left FB at the end of 2012. I have an issue with the "privacy" within the service, so decided to opt out. Besides, I tend to keep track of my friends quite well without resorting to FB. Even when I had an account I rarely logged into it.

I have no problem with others on it however, my wife is a bit of a fan, but I personally don't see the need.

One thing I don't like is the growing trend to gain access to other services via a FB account. It is almost forcing users to it.

I don't use twitter either, I think I commented on it once or twice, but I'm becoming a fan of Bootstrap :-)

It is possible to use Facebook without caring much about it one way or another.

Check it every now and then, Like things you like, close browser and move on with life. The best of both worlds.

I disagree. I have found it much easier to tell people "I don't use Facebook" than "I use Facebook but not the way you want me to". All my friends have had to deal with people who get offended if you don't friend them, or upset if you don't check it daily, or can't understand why you don't want inappropriate comments/links on your public posts. Different people use Facebook in completely different ways, so normal social conventions of what is appropriate just don't translate.

The most I have had to deal with is a few people deciding I'm not worth the effort of keeping in touch with if I wouldn't use Facebook, and I think I dodged a bullet in those cases.

Edit: I should clarify that the "dodge the bullet" comment is only applying to would-be friends where I currently live. By not using facebook I also don't communicate with out-of-town friends and relatives nearly as much as would have otherwise, and that is a genuine loss, not a "dodged bullet". But the trade off it is worth it to me for the decrease in day-to-day drama and increase in privacy.

I have never (and do not intend to) signed up for Facebook because I do not want to participate in the insanity I continually read about it. But this has left me in an unenviable position of social "non-existence."

Scores, if not hundreds, of communications technologies/channels/networks exist, but most of my acquaintances won't use anything other than Facebook. They say I don't reach out -- but I do. And then on the rare chance I somehow do get some kind of reply, it's often, "you should open a Facebook account."

I would like to see if a study has been done (or will be done) to determine just how "invasive" Facebook is in everyday social interaction. Is my experience isolated or is it regular? I'd be interested to see the results.